Letters to the Editor 02-23-2014

Sunday

Feb 23, 2014 at 6:02 AMFeb 25, 2014 at 6:02 AM

Big enough to take it all

Arriving home after collecting the post recently, I found there was an envelope containing a blurb from Victor Valley College, printed courtesy of Xerox. The pamphlet was to inform us of the "2013 Tax Benefits for Higher Education Tax Credits and Deductions."

Every entity I've ever worked for, and any agency in which fiscal dealings and the taxes of same are foremost, has had (please correct me if I'm wrong), the legal obligation of providing one with pertinent tax information for the previous year by Jan. 31 of the current year. I'm not holding the college culpable for this, despite the postmark on the envelope being Feb. 18, 2014. Why? Because the first paragraph in the flyer states, and I quote, "Important Notice — When this brochure went to print, the IRS had not updated Publication 970 for the 2013 tax season."

Now then. Considering that both of my children have attended VVC in the past "tax season," and the fact that our family, having already dutifully filed our taxes and now gratefully expecting a small refund by Monday next, would it not be incumbent of a government agency to inform the public that either a) "You may have enjoyed more of a refund if we could locate our own bottom with both hands," or b) "No worries, it'll all come out in the wash next year"?

Reminds me of that old saw from Jefferson: "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have ..."

Needless to say, I didn't copy the IRS on this one; government at its finest, indeed.

Andrew HowardApple Valley

The enemy within

In a recent column, Charles Krauthammer reminds us of the way in which Hitler rose to power in 1930s Germany, and how Obama's rise to power closely parallels the way Hitler did it. By putting the emphasis on how Germans handled it in the past, and how the American public will react today, Mr. Krauthammer has managed to make his point without seeming to be too confrontational. Those who have their eyes open will certainly get the message.

There are, of course, some differences between Mr. Krauthammer and Mr. Obama. First of all, Mr. Obama manages to appear much more charismatic and charming, in public, at least. He is very slick, and is being careful not to push too hard. This way he has so far been able to slip the noose over our collective heads with most of us not realizing what is happening. His recent move toward putting government monitors (the Federal Communications Commission) in all news dispensing outlets is a sign that he feels confident enough in the control he has so far, that he is willing to start tightening the noose even further.

The second difference I see is that while Hitler focused on making Germany stronger, with the eventual goal of world domination, it seems all Obama wants to do is tear our nation apart. If you want evidence to support that, simply examine the results of his efforts over the last five years. Do you have more liberty and more prosperity than you did five years ago? Is our nation stronger, more financially stable, or more respected around the globe?

The truth is we are being systematically destroyed from within by a Trojan Horse.

Gabriel PortilloHesperia

Repeating the spin

Re: "Obamacare 'disincentive'" (Jonathan Haas, Letters, Feb. 21).

Jonathan Haas wrote, "Last week the Congressional Budget Office released a report saying that over the next 10 years the increased availability of affordable health insurance through the Affordable Care Act will allow more than two million hard-working Americans to either finally retire or cut back on their working hours to spend more time with their families because they were no longer dependent upon their employers for health insurance."

The CBO report said nothing of the sort. The CBO doesn't add commentary to its reports, it only deals with facts and figures supplied by Congress relating to individual bills or proposed bills. Mr. Haas has merely repeated the spin coming from the usual suspects in the Democrat party, led by "put a happy-face on it" spin-masters Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

Mr. Haas repeats the Democrat spin that "people won't be forced to work two or three jobs just to make ends meet." People need to make ends meet, but now they will reap the benefits of being able to reduce their working hours by their own choice, and therefore voluntarily forfeit hundreds of dollars a month in order to qualify for maybe one-hundred dollars a month in Obamacare subsidies?" Yeah, that makes sense.

Darrel HagenVictorville

All-out offensive

Thomas Whittington calls the Republican Right's war on women a "catch phrase."

In recent years conservative Republicans have engaged in an all out offensive against women's rights aimed at undermining or overturning virtually all gains women have made in the past century or so, working hard to keep women lower class citizens in their own country.

They've fought against equal pay for equal work, weakened the Violence Against Women Act, cut services like Head Start and preschool programs for low income children and want to cut programs providing food stamps and other aid to low income mothers and children as well as cut funding for employment services, meals and housing for senior citizens, most of them women.

They want to redefine the term "rape" (all rapes are "forcible") and force women to give birth to their rapist's baby. They want to call the victims of sexual assault "accusers" instead, and they believe some women should be held at least partially responsible for their own rapes because we apparently cannot hold men responsible for their own actions.

They want to cut funding for women's health clinics because, as we all know, the only service such clinics provide is abortion, and if a woman should chose an abortion she must first be subjected to a vaginal probe (but don't ask gun owners to tolerate a background check) and some South Dakota Republicans proposed a bill that would have made it legal in that state to kill an abortion provider. So much for "pro-life."

And if, heaven forbid, any women dare to speak out, they are called "femiNazis" or slandered in outrageous smear campaigns in which even their families and children are attacked.

Calling anything the government does to help the people "socialism" is a catch phrase, as is calling fair taxation "redistribution of wealth" or sensible gun laws "disarmament." Calling the Republicans' assault on women and women's rights a "war" is a frighteningly accurate description of the Republican right's attitude and actions toward women. Yet they still can't understand why most women vote for Democrats.

Angela TambayApple Valley

Still a Christian nation

The American Civil Liberties Union said recently in protesting the cross on the San Gabriel Mission that this nation is not a Christian, not Jewish, not a Muslim nation. The ACLU could not be more wrong.

This nation was founded first and foremost on Christian principles. It was then and is now still a Christian nation. Thousands of our people have died defending that principle so we could have the freedoms we have been fortunate to have. We invited people from all over the world to come, enjoy the freedoms, and worship as they please.

This does not mean that we are no longer a Christians nation. That is what we have always been, in spite of those who would make us into something ese.